Arafat makes his intentions clear. He didn't count on Monica and her dress.

How Monica Lewinsky and her dress destroyed the Middle East Peace Accords

WASHINGTON --- Sitting in the lobby of the Mayflower Hotel here, the famously quick-
tongued Yossi Beilin seemed, for once, almost at a loss
for words. What, after all, do Israeli socialists know about
cocktail dresses?

One thing, it turns out: that they distract
Washington's attention from urgent problems around the
world.

"To think that the greatest power on earth is out of commission because of
Monica Lewinsky's dress -- it's one of the most surreal
episodes in history."

Last January, when the world first learned of
Ms. Lewinsky, the presidential sex scandal triggered a
sudden mood swing in U.S.-Israel relations. Prime
Minister Binyamin Netanyahu had just landed in
Washington, expecting to have Bill Clinton read him the
riot act for what the Administration saw as foot-dragging on the peace process.

Enter Ms. Lewinsky, and Mr. Clinton was suddenly preoccupied. Mr.
Netanyahu had an unexpectedly placid visit and returned
to Israel a happy man.

Seven months later, Dr. Beilin was in Washington
as part of a four-member delegation of Labour Party
leaders. Led by party chairman Ehud Barak, they came in hopes of burnishing their image
as a viable alternative to Mr. Netanyahu.

Their prospects seemed bright on the eve of
departure. The Knesset had taken a key step towards
dissolving itself and calling new elections, handing
Mr. Netanyahu one of the worst political reverses of his
tenure.

"That means we're here as a group that could
come to power in the near future," Dr. Beilin maintained.

To their dismay, they arrived to find that President
Clinton, too, had just been handed one of the worst
political reverses of his tenure: Ms. Lewinsky's decision
to testify about the alleged affair and to hand over a
certain cocktail dress. Nobody in Washington was
talking about anything else.

"It's depressing," the usually ebullient Dr. Beilin said.

"The news begins and ends with Monica's dress. It feels
as though reality has been shoved aside in favor of
some virtual reality."

The Labour MS's message was that the Administration
should keep pushing for an Israeli-Palestinian deal.
Washington has been pressing Jerusalem for months to
give the Palestinians 13.1 percent of the West Bank in
exchange for a string of concessions.

Israel has resisted mightily. A few weeks ago Washington
effectively stopped pushing. Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright now says the sides should work
things out by themselves.

The Labour people believe the hands-off approach is a
mistake.

With nearly half of Mr. Netanyahu's own coalition
favoring the US plan, plus the half of Israel
that voted against Mr. Netanyahu, the proposal has far more
support in Israel than the Premier's spokesmen let on,
they argue. Now is the time to push.

U.S. PRESSURE 'UNLIKELY'

Unfortunately, said Dr. Beilin, "the United States is
not available right now, because it's somewhere else.
It's caught up in some sort of virtual reality. The
fact is that there is a reality out there. It's called
international conflict.

"And right now the victims of those conflicts feel that the so-called policeman of
the world can't respond. As a citizen of the world,
it's one of the most frustrating things imaginable to
see the world's only superpower paralyzed by this
foolishness."
Administration officials take sharp exception to the
idea that they're paralyzed.

"This thing's been going on for months," sniffed one official. "It hasn't
stopped us from being active on a lot of fronts. We've
been active in Iraq. We've been active in China. If
we're less active in the peace process, it's because
that's what the policy calls for."

Privately, many officials concede that Middle East
policy is heavily influenced by domestic politics. No
one admits Ms. Lewinsky is a factor. But they do admit the
question of how heavily Washington can pressure
Jerusalem is, as one official put it, "very complicated
right now."

To a degree the complications aren't new.

Jewish community leaders, though divided on how much Israel
should give away, tend to close ranks in the face of
administration pressure. It's a powerful deterrent.

"There are other constraints, too," says an official.
"The Republicans in Congress, the Christian
fundamentalist community -- all the levers Mr. Netanyahu
pulls so well when he's here. The're all voices the
administration has to listen to."

At the moment, the voice speaking loudest is the
Jewish community.

The reason is simple. In times of
crisis, Presidents fall back on core constituencies.

For a Democrat, that begins with Jews. "The last thing
the president wants to do at a time like this is offend
his best friends," said a Washington political
activist, noting that Clinton was spending the weekend
as Steven Spielberg's houseguest.

DOMESTIC POLITICS PARAMOUNT

In recent months, say sources close to the
Administration, Clinton aides have been sharply divided
over whether or not to step up the pressure on Israel
to accept the 13.1 percent deal.

Those favoring
increased pressure, mainly at the State Department,
insist the President has more leeway to act than he
assumes, because of divisions within the Jewish
community over the peace process and religious
pluralism. And they say time is running out.

Within the State Department, a small faction
reportedly opposes pressuring on Israel on principle.
The faction is said to be led by Dennis Ross, the
special Middle East negotiator, who has privately
argued for years that pressure only causes Israel to
dig in its heels.

Since Netanyahu's election in 1996, Ross's position
has been the minority view. The State Department, with
White House blessing, has chosen high-profile activism.

"Everything we've done since Mr. Netanyahu's election was
to find a way to keep the process going, while
preserving the fundamentals of the U.S.-Israel
relationship," says one official.